Pamela Uthappa

Independent PR Professional

[Pamela Uthappa @PUthappa]

@RanvirShorey Inciting people again

[Dilpreet Grewal ☬ @DpreetG]

Dare not associate our name with yours.

You have no right to speak for us!
We sikh love India 🇮🇳
We love peace. ❤️
We hate you 🫵

[Wren @wrendom]

Congrats! You're officially qualified to join Congress. Rahul Gandhi made the same allegation in 2023 and that too in London

[Colonel Rohit Dev (RDX) 🇮🇳 @RDXThinksThat]

Good to see Team @DelhiPolice exposing #CJPsadakchaps and Liar @abhijeet_dipke who wanted to use his Grandmother's Death for Political Grandstanding, supported by other Criminals who spread Falsehood against @DelhiGovDigital too through Press Conference

Shame on pliable Media !

[Abhijit Iyer-Mitra @Iyervval]

Can we count up the number of lies that @abhijeet_dipke @SauravDassss & @AshutoshRanka have told so far?
• sexuality
• sources of income
• tenancy & rent
• employment
• education & degrees
• parentage
• past affiliation
• police brutality
This list is never ending

[The Pamphlet @Pamphlet_in]

सीजेपी (CJP) नेताओं ने केवल अपने 'पसंदीदा मीडिया' के सवालों के जवाब दिए और हमारे सवालों से भाग खड़े हुए। जो आंदोलन पारदर्शिता और ईमानदारी की मांग पर खड़ा हुआ था, आज वही CJP खुद सच का सामना करने से डर रहा है!

@SinghRanu18 | @sarkarprabhat28 | @Bhag_Shree_Bhag

[Ankur Singh @AnkurSingh]

Delhi Police exposed Lies of Abhijeet Dipke!

CJP lied that Dipke kept requesting to allow him talk to his family because his grandmother died, but police denied.

Delhi Police released Video Proof that police asked him to talk to his family or wants to go to his home.

It was Abhijeet Dipke who denied.

He wanted to use his grandmother's dead body for his cheap politics.

Dipke is bigger fraud and chameleon than Kejriwal.

Shame!

[Amit Kumar Sindhi @AMIT_GUJJU]

Abhijeet Dipke and Ashutosh Ranka are the biggest liars in the country, just like their boss, Arvind Kejriwal.

At today’s PC, Ashutosh Ranka claimed that when Dipke’s grandmother passed away during his detention, he was not even allowed to speak to his family.

Delhi Police held a PC and showed video footage of Dipke being repeatedly asked whether he wanted to speak to a family member or return home. He was even offered a special flight.

Shame on Abhijeet Dipke for playing politics over his own grandmother’s death. How low can someone stoop for political mileage?

[🇮🇳 Esha(এষা) SenGupto Dethe @D_Esha23]

“I stand with India, I stand with Modi”

Quote & Continue

[ಅಪೂರ್ವ ಶೇಖರ್ 👸🏻 @ApoorvaShekhar]

Muchkond kutkolo bevarsi.. Didn't NOTA get more votes than you? 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[Pooja Tiwari @PoojaHindu50]

जंतर मंतर पर अजीत अंजुम की जबरदस्त धुलाई

अजीत अंजुम के मुंह से आवाज तक नहीं निकली

राष्ट्रवादी भाई ने झूठ के एजेंडे को बेनकाब कर दिया

🐕 की तरह कू कू करता रह गया 😆🤣

[Delhi Police @DelhiPolice]

It takes courage, patience and intentions to remain gentle in difficult times.

#DPUpdates

[Colonel Rohit Dev (RDX) 🇮🇳 @RDXThinksThat]

PS - His Grandmother passed away

Some say he knew before he took flight for Delhi

Some say he hasn't reached there

Fact is he knows and has been supported by Police and Administration but he chooses to target India rather than first saying farewell to departed Grandmother

Jo Ghar ka nahin hua woh Desh ka kya hoga

Jo Desh ka nahin hua woh Gaddaar hi hoga

[Wren @wrendom]

Not Dipke.
Not Ranka.
Not Rathee.
Not Rahul.
Not Kejriwal.
Not Akhilesh.
Not Uddhav.

I wanna see this guy’s downfall first.

[Advocate Yogesh Aggarwal @AdYogeshh]

Let's get the facts right.

This wasn't a forced release. Under Section 170 BNSS, a preventive arrest can't extend beyond 24 hours, and under Section 126 a magistrate can release a person on a bond to keep the peace. Abhijeet Dipke, Ashutosh Ranka and Saurav Das were produced, executed the bond and were released. Standard procedure, nothing more.

I'm not sure what kind of legal advice you're getting.

[Pamela Uthappa @PUthappa]

@NewspressX Why would we support them..dont ask these questions again

[Pamela Uthappa @PUthappa]

@abhijeet_dipke We love our Prime Minister

[Mahesh Vikram Hegde 🇮🇳 @mvmeet]

16 cases. Jailed three times
Yet, I never signed any bond to get out of jail
I’m not a coward like him
I proudly say, I am a NATIONALIST

[Nupur J Sharma @UnSubtleDesi]

Here’s what you do when you have the truth on your side.

Mamata filed Multiple FIRs against me, interrogated me and my husband for hours and even filed a CID case.

I offered no apology. No undertaking. No bond. No application for anticipatory bail. No compromise.

I left my home. Sold my business. Moved across the country with my baby. I survived and fought. The court said the FIRs were vindictive and forced the state to either withdraw or face punitive costs.

Court asked if I wanted to fight for compensation. I refused. I don’t want blood money.

That’s how you fight for the truth, you cowardly anarchist.

Add - you signed a bond because you knew you’d be arrested. You knew you had sparked anarchy and violence. You KNOW you are a criminal.

The state in your case followed the law. The only criminal and the only coward here, is you.

[Aabhas Maldahiyar 🇮🇳 @Aabhas24]

1/2 Telchatta Abhijeet Dipke, calling Narendra Modi a “coward and bully” does not make you courageous. It merely exposes how easily political anger can substitute for constitutional understanding.

You have demanded the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over the SIR exercise. Fine. Bring the evidence. Demonstrate deliberate wrongdoing. Establish who was responsible and what law was violated. But you cannot convert an allegation into a conviction and then declare the Prime Minister a coward because the constitutional machinery does not obey your political demands.

A resignation is not a substitute for proof. A protest is not a court verdict. And your whims are not article in the Constitution.

Let us examine your arguments.

First, the much-repeated figure of 13 crore. Electoral entries flagged during revision are not automatically 13 crore eligible citizens proven to have been disenfranchised. Deceased electors, duplicate registrations, permanently shifted voters and people whom BLOs could not trace are distinct categories. Every wrongful exclusion deserves correction, and the Election Commission must answer legitimate questions. But where is your evidence that every flagged entry represents a genuine voter deliberately removed to manipulate an election?

You saw a number. You turned it into a verdict.

Second, explain your constitutional remedy. Article 324(5) protects the Chief Election Commissioner through a removal procedure comparable to that applicable to a Supreme Court judge. Removal requires the prescribed parliamentary process on grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity. Neither a street demonstration nor a demand for resignation can replace it.

You may campaign for his removal. You may criticise him. You may seek legal remedies. But if you claim to be defending the Constitution, you should understand the difference between demanding an outcome and establishing the grounds for it.

Third, your description of Modi as an embarrassment to India is particularly absurd when delivered as though it were an uncontested fact.

Narendra Modi has led India at G20 and G7 summits, strengthened strategic partnerships and received numerous foreign state honours. In June 2026, he attended the G7 summit in France and met international leaders. You may disagree with his domestic policies, question his decisions or challenge his government. That is your democratic right. But pretending that India’s Prime Minister has no international standing is simply dishonest. His international profile is a matter of public record, whatever one’s opinion of his performance.

You do not have to admire Modi. But you should at least distinguish your personal dislike from the diplomatic reality of the country he represents.

Now comes the part your rhetoric conveniently avoids: what happened at your own movement’s earlier protest.

On July 20, 2026, the CJP-led protest march in Delhi turned violent. According to Delhi Police, 118 police personnel were injured. The Indian Express reported that more than 170 people, including protesters and security personnel, were injured during the clashes. Police also alleged damage to government vehicles and public property. These are reported figures and allegations, not a judicial finding that every protester was responsible. But they are serious enough that no responsible organiser can pretend the history is irrelevant.

When a previous mobilisation associated with your movement results in clashes, scores of injured personnel and damage to public property, authorities have legitimate reasons to assess security risks before another large demonstration.